Obama's Gay Marriage Evolution is Offensive to God and America

Discussion in 'Current Events' started by sammy, May 15, 2012.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. sammy

    sammy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2009
    Messages:
    3,733
    Likes Received:
    337
    Trophy Points:
    83
    False, the Bible is the most respected writing the world has ever known.

    Written by multiple men over multiple years and yet it never contains an error or
    contradicts itself. Even atheists will admit it is a historical masterpiece.

    Millions of people read it daily!

    Did you know the following common phrases come from the bible?

    All things to all men;
    The blind leading the blind;
    Can a leopard change its spots?
    A fly in the ointment;
    The writing on the wall


    In case you feel that something is wrong in the United States today, you aren't crazy.
    Obama has sent the United States into a decline never before seen in it's history. More than 500K college graduates entered the job market in May and less than 69K new private sector jobs were available for them. You do the math!
     
  2. Gaymom

    Gaymom New Member

    Joined:
    May 21, 2012
    Messages:
    881
    Likes Received:
    15
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Contains multiple errors and constantly contradicts itself.

    But don't let verifiable facts stop you from lying.
     
  3. sammy

    sammy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2009
    Messages:
    3,733
    Likes Received:
    337
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Like I said before, we stick to facts not opinion. Here are a few that show the Bible is
    supported by other historical documents and findings:

    A Common Flood Story. Not just the Hebrews (Gen. 6–8), but Mesopotamians, Egyptians, and Greeks all report a flood in primordial times. A Sumerian king list from c. 2100 BC divides itself into two categories: those kings who ruled before a great flood and those who ruled after it. One of the earliest examples of Sumero-Akkadian-Babylonian literature, the Gilgamesh Epic, describes a great flood sent as punishment by the gods, with humanity saved only when the pious Utnapishtim (AKA, “the Mesopotamian Noah”) builds a ship and saves the animal world thereon. A later Greek counterpart, the story of Deucalion and Phyrra, tells of a couple who survived a great flood sent by an angry Zeus. Taking refuge atop Mount Parnassus (AKA, “the Greek Ararat”), they supposedly repopulated the earth by heaving stones behind them that sprang into human beings.

    The Code of Hammurabi. This seven-foot black diorite stele, discovered at Susa and presently located in the Louvre museum, contains 282 engraved laws of Babylonian King Hammurabi (fl. 1750 BC). The common basis for this law code is the lex talionis (“the law of the tooth”), showing that there was a common Semitic law of retribution in the ancient Near East, which is clearly reflected in the Pentateuch. Exodus 21:23–25, for example, reads: “But if there is serious injury, you are to take life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot…” (niv).

    The Nuzi Tablets. The some 20,000 cuneiform clay tablets discovered at the ruins of Nuzi, east of the Tigris River and datable to c. 1500 BC, reveal institutions, practices, and customs remarkably congruent to those found in Genesis. These tablets include treaties, marriage arrangements, rules regarding inheritance, adoption, and the like.

    The Existence of Hittites. Genesis 23 reports that Abraham buried Sarah in the Cave of Machpelah, which he purchased from Ephron the Hittite. Second Samuel 11 tells of David’s adultery with Bathsheba, the wife of Uriah the Hittite. A century ago the Hittites were unknown outside of the Old Testament, and critics claimed that they were a figment of biblical imagination. In 1906, however, archaeologists digging east of Ankara, Turkey, discovered the ruins of Hattusas, the ancient Hittite capital at what is today called Boghazkoy, as well as its vast collection of Hittite historical records, which showed an empire flourishing in the mid-second millennium BC. This critical challenge, among many others, was immediately proved worthless — a pattern that would often be repeated in the decades to come.

    The Merneptah Stele. A seven-foot slab engraved with hieroglyphics, also called the Israel Stele, boasts of the Egyptian pharaoh’s conquest of Libyans and peoples in Palestine, including the Israelites: “Israel — his seed is not.” This is the earliest reference to Israel in nonbiblical sources and demonstrates that, as of c. 1230 BC, the Hebrews were already living in the Promised Land.
     
  4. Shiva_TD

    Shiva_TD Progressive Libertarian Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2008
    Messages:
    45,715
    Likes Received:
    885
    Trophy Points:
    113
    In addressing the proposal of the First Amendment's protections of religion the following was cited as the authoritive position of the founders in the case of Reynolds v US by the Supreme Court as it reflected the political opinion of both the Federalists and Anti-Federalists:

    http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cgi-bin/getcase.pl?court=us&vol=98&invol=145

    In this statement which was universally accepted as the definative statement related to religion and God Jefferson established that "religion is a matter which lies solely between man and his God" which means that every person determines who "God" is and not everyone agrees that God is the "Christian God" and any statement that says that anything "offends God" is inherently flawed because we don't know what the individual perceives as God. For Christians, Jews and Muslims "God" is the "God of Abraham" but for tens of millions of others that is not their "God" and so any statement has to be clarified, specific and limited.

    A person can state that "same-sex marriage is offensive to MY GOD" but they cannot say "same-sex marriage is offensive to America" as America was founded upon the ideal that every individual defined their "own God" and that the violations of the inalienable Rights of the Individual to exercise their own personal religious beliefs, so long as they violated no one else's inalienable Rights, is what is offensive. Denial of same-sex [gender] marriage violates the religious beliefs of those that choose to engage in those marriages and that is offensive in America.
     
  5. Kessy_Athena

    Kessy_Athena New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2010
    Messages:
    1,760
    Likes Received:
    57
    Trophy Points:
    0
    When you quote someone in the thread, even if you don't want to use the full quote, you should make sure to leave in the full (QUOTE=sammy;1061301814) part of the tag. This both will indicate who you're quoting as a courtesy to readers, and will put in a little arrow that links to the previous post. Also, if you want something to appear at the end of each of your posts, you should go to the nav bar at the very top of the page and click Settings, then on the sidebar under My Settings \ My Profile click Edit Signature. You can put whatever you like in the text box, and once you save it, it will automatically be appended to all of your posts.

    Now, on to your post... The Christian's book never contradicts itself? Oh really? Let's sample a few quotes from it then, shall we?
    -----
    MAT 1:16 And Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ.

    LUK 3:23 And Jesus himself began to be about thirty years of age, being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph, which was the son of Heli.
    -----
    MAT 28:1 In the end of the sabbath, as it began to dawn toward the first day of the week, came Mary Magdalene and the other Mary to see the sepulchre.

    MAR 16:1 And when the sabbath was past, Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James, and Salome, had bought sweet spices, that they might come and anoint him.

    JOH 20:1 The first day of the week cometh Mary Magdalene early, when it was yet dark, unto the sepulchre, and seeth the stone taken away from the sepulchre.
    ------
    GEN 1:25 And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good.
    GEN 1:26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.

    GEN 2:18 And the LORD God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him.
    GEN 2:19 And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof.
    ------
    1KI 4:26 And Solomon had forty thousand stalls of horses for his chariots, and twelve thousand horsemen.

    2CH 9:25 And Solomon had four thousand stalls for horses and chariots, and twelve thousand horsemen; whom he bestowed in the chariot cities, and with the king at Jerusalem.
    ------
    ACT 1:18: "Now this man (Judas) purchased a field with the reward of iniquity; and falling headlong, he burst asunder in the midst, and all his bowels gushed out."

    MAT 27:5-7: "And he (Judas) cast down the pieces of silver in the temple, and departed, and went and hanged himself. And the chief priests...bought with them the potter's field."
    ------
    MAT 27:46,50: "And about the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, "Eli, eli, lama sabachthani?" that is to say, "My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?" ...Jesus, when he cried again with a loud voice, yielded up the ghost."

    LUK 23:46: "And when Jesus had cried with a loud voice, he said, "Father, unto thy hands I commend my spirit:" and having said thus, he gave up the ghost."

    JOH 19:30: "When Jesus therefore had received the vinegar, he said, "It is finished:" and he bowed his head, and gave up the ghost."
    -------

    This is, of course, only a small sample. For me, you can check the site I got these from, http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/jim_meritt/bible-contradictions.html
    Or you can always ask google yourself. Or try actually reading the darn thing.

    And while the Christian's book maybe your most respected book, it is not the most respected book in the world. In terms of sheer numbers, I'm sure the Vedas and the writings of Confucius have it beat by a mile.

    And if you're going to weigh the holiness of a text by sales numbers, that must make Playboy Magazine pretty sacred, huh? Maybe we should build a temple to it?
     
  6. sammy

    sammy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2009
    Messages:
    3,733
    Likes Received:
    337
    Trophy Points:
    83
    You can very easily if the majority of America believes in that same God!

    Only 13% of the US fails to identify with some religion.


    In case you feel that something is wrong in the United States today, you aren't crazy.
    Obama has sent the United States into a decline never before seen in it's history. More than 500K college graduates entered the job market in May and less than 69K new private sector jobs were available for them. You do the math!
     
  7. sammy

    sammy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2009
    Messages:
    3,733
    Likes Received:
    337
    Trophy Points:
    83
    It is a small sample and yet not one contradiction was shown. Where is your explanation of just one contradiction?


    Waiting!


    In case you feel that something is wrong in the United States today, you aren't crazy.
    Obama has sent the United States into a decline never before seen in it's history. More than 500K college graduates entered the job market in May and less than 69K new private sector jobs were available for them. You do the math!
     
  8. Shiva_TD

    Shiva_TD Progressive Libertarian Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2008
    Messages:
    45,715
    Likes Received:
    885
    Trophy Points:
    113
    FALSE or at least it should be false in the United States and the United States was based upon the political belief in the inalienable Rights of the People and not on the theology of any religion. There have been exceptions but those exceptions violate the First Amendment's provisions related to Religious Freedom.

    False on two counts. First of all the Bible was written by men and not by God. Next is that the "equality of men" originates from the political philosophy of the "social contract" that orignated with the writings Socrates and Plato, later addressed by other philosphers such as Thomas Hobbes and John Locke. It did not come from the Bible.

    http://www.iep.utm.edu/soc-cont/#H1

    False. Private property rights existed from the very beginning of agrarian society when mankind transitioned from hunter/gathers to farmers. This was perhaps ten thousand years before the Bible was written.

    Once again this is false as it is based upon the political philosophy of the "Social Contract" that originated with Socrates. (link provided above)

    The problem with the economy is not a serious problem when compared to the threat against our civil liberties and rights as individuals that the "Christian Right" represents with it's "social conservative" authoritarian political agenda based upon Biblical theocratic law. The economy will recover but the threat of invidious religious intolerance and discrimination by the "Christian Right" seems to be unending. Only the Supreme Court stands between the inalienable Rights of the American People and the religious intolerance of social conservatives that they codify into law.

    The economy is recovering and that recovery today has been slowed because of the financial problems in Europe and China and has little to do with our government. The future economy is threatened though but that is equal regardless of whether we address the fiscal policies of Obama or Romney that both advocate the continued expansion of the US government based upon deficit spending which increases the national debt and the national debt is already more than the US taxpayer can afford.
     
  9. Kessy_Athena

    Kessy_Athena New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2010
    Messages:
    1,760
    Likes Received:
    57
    Trophy Points:
    0
    ~_~ Dude...

    It's a contradiction to first say that Joseph's father was Jacob, and then to say his father was Heli.
    It's a contradiction to first say that at a particular event, Mary Magdalene and the other Mary were present, then later to say that Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James, and Salome were present, and then yet later to say that just Mary Magdalene was present.
    It's a contradiction to say that animals were created before humans, and then later to say that animals were created after humans.
    It's a contradiction to say that Solomon had 40,000 stalls for horses for his chariot corps, then to say he only had 4,000.
    It's a contradiction to say that Judas used his payment to buy a field and then died from having his abdomen explode, and then to say that he threw the money back into the temple and gone and hanged himself.
    It's a contradiction to say that Jesus's last words were, "My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?", then to say his last words were, "Father, unto thy hands I commend my spirit," and then to say that his last words were, "It is finished."

    Or are you confused about what a contradiction is?

    And just because people call themselves Christians doesn't mean they agree with your politics, or even that their religious attitudes are at all similar to yours.
     
  10. Shiva_TD

    Shiva_TD Progressive Libertarian Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2008
    Messages:
    45,715
    Likes Received:
    885
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Here is the fallacy of the argument that "if the majority of America believes in that same God" that laws can be based upon those religious beliefs. In the US Supreme Court case of Reynolds v US the following was a part of that decision as it relates to the passage of the First Amendment's protection for the expression of religious beliefs.

    http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cgi-bin/getcase.pl?court=us&vol=98&invol=145

    Key elements are established in this decision.

    First and foremost is that religion is the personal belief of the individual regardless of any religious institution or religious dogma. For example, just because the Catholic Church, for example, expresses a religious belief it cannot be assumed that that belief is shared by the members of the Catholic Church. A prime example of this is that the Catholic Church opposes birth control but 98% of Catholic women (as I recall) use birth control at some point in their life so obviously, at a personal level, this dogmatic teaching of the Church is not embraced by the individuals that are members of the Catholic Church. The leaders of the Church may agree on it but their opinion doesn't matter. Only the individual's personal religious beliefs matter. With that "theocratic" law become irrelevant under the First Amendment. A Christian very well can believe that same-sex [gender] marriage is acceptable based upon their personal religious beliefs and their beliefs, not the dogma of the Church, is what is protected.

    As note, the Supreme Court accepted Thomas Jefferson's statements related to the First Amendment, which was created by Madison, as being the foremost authority on the subject of the protections of religious beliefs. The Amendment was written by one side of the political isle, Madison, and confirmed by the opposite side, Jefferson. There was unanimous consent that the First Amendment was founded upon the religious belief of each and every individual and that no one else's religious beliefs could infringe upon that under the laws of the United States.

    Finally, the government could not legislate religious opinion, period. Congress was explicitly deprived of this authority. It was limited to addressing matters "which were in violation of social duties or subversive of good order." Same-sex [gender] marriage does not establish either and, in fact, same-sex [gender] marriage encourages "good order" and the "social duties" of those involved just as it does with opposite-sex [gender] marriage. The two are identical in this regard.

    There's only one real negative related to the Supreme Court decision in Reynolds v US and that is after making this statement in it's decision the Court then went on to ignore it completely. Overall the decision is flawed because it ended up imposing Christian religious intolerance under the Constitution which really did violate Reynold's religious Rights under the First Amendment.
     
  11. dixon76710

    dixon76710 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2010
    Messages:
    58,376
    Likes Received:
    4,438
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Ever read "The Reasonableness of Christianity, as Delivered in the Scriptures" or "A Vindication of the Reasonableness of Christianity"? In 1776 the Bible was the number 1 best seller of published material in the US, until Thomas Paines "Common Sense" took its place, using the bible to demonstrate the illigitimacy of the divine rule of Monarchs. Americas creation was the fullfilment of the Protestant reformation. Removing the authority of the church to ordain monarchs with gods authority to govern, and return that authority to the individual, where it belonged all along before the Catholic Church hijacked it in the 4th century. Beginning in 313 until 1776 what we saw was CHURCH doctrine. Returning to biblical doctrine and government of, by and for the people, endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights.
     
  12. Shiva_TD

    Shiva_TD Progressive Libertarian Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2008
    Messages:
    45,715
    Likes Received:
    885
    Trophy Points:
    113
    In summary these texts advocated what Socrates and Plato had previously advocated in Greece which was a democracy based upon the will of the People and not a monarchy based upon the Divine Right of Kings. Go figure, these Christain scholars were only reciting that which the Greeks had established in the 5th Century BC.

    Of course the Divine Right of Kings existed long before the Catholic Church. Egypt was ruled by divine monarch as were other ancient cultures such as the Mayans and Incas that had absolutely no knowledge of the Catholic Church.

    It's also not amazing that "Christians" in the American Colonies expressed these same ancient revelations as European Christians, many that has come to America to escape the persecution of the "Christian" Church which included both the Catholic Church as well as the Church of England headed by the King of England.

    The First Amendment basically said, "Screw the Church, any and every Church, because every individual has the Right to their own personal religious beliefs and no one is allowed to impose their religious beliefs on another person, period."

    A person today can believe in the Flying Spaghetti Monster and the "8 I'd Really Rather You Didn'ts" and that's fine. It's their religious belief and so long as they don't force their beliefs on other or through their actions infringe upon anyone else's inalienable Rights then the First Amendment protects their Right to exercise their religious beliefs.

    That's where today's Social Conservatives of the Religious Right like Santorum, Bachmann and Romney are wrong. They advocate violation of the Right of Every American to exercise their personal religious beliefs that don't cause any violation of anyone else's protected Constitutional Rights. Same-sex [gender] marriage between consenting adults doesn't violate anyone's protected Rights, period, and that is the only grounds under the US Constitution that is allowable for denying someone from exercising their personal religious beliefs related to marriage under the laws of the United States.

    Congress shall make no law based upon opinion restricting the exercising of religious beliefs of the individual (re: Reynolds v US).
     
  13. Kessy_Athena

    Kessy_Athena New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2010
    Messages:
    1,760
    Likes Received:
    57
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I think it's a huge stretch to try to link the Reformation to democracy. The Reformation was driven by corrupt practices of the Catholic hierarchy, and was about trying to purify the church and return it to what they perceived as the original form of Christianity. The Protestants wanted to replace papal authority with biblical authority. This is really where the notion of biblical literalism got going in a big way.

    When Protestants gained power in parts of Europe during the reformation, they did not try to unseat any monarchs, they did not try to abolish the aristocracy, they didn't try to establish democracy. When radical Protestants went to the New World to establish their ideal christian societies - most notably the Puritans in Massachusetts - they did not set up democracies, they set up theocracies. Power lay with the religious leaders, and heretics were persecuted, and often driven out. When their descendants participated in the American Revolution a few generations latter, they explicitly rejected that theocratic model. They'd seen that sort of government in practice, and they didn't like it.

    In any case, christian doctrine is not democratic in any way, shape or form. Christianity believes in a single all powerful god with absolute authority over everything. Christian social order was not about the people, it was about their god. Even today, christians frequently say that we need to center our lives around their god, not around humanity. A society centered on a single absolute authority is about as antithetical to democracy as you can get. Democracy has its roots in a society that was pagan, polytheistic, and relatively secular. It grew out of the philosophy of rationalism, the notion that truth was best arrived at through reason and logic, not through consulting the gods.
     
    Shiva_TD and (deleted member) like this.
  14. FreshAir

    FreshAir Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2012
    Messages:
    150,175
    Likes Received:
    62,815
    Trophy Points:
    113
    of course, both the Christian and Muslim religions have the same base religion and same God, so one would expect them to be alike in many ways, yet different at the same time
     
  15. dixon76710

    dixon76710 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2010
    Messages:
    58,376
    Likes Received:
    4,438
    Trophy Points:
    113
    And one of the corrupt practices of the catholic hierarchy was ordaining monarchs with Gods authority to rule.

    "They" being the operative word. As opposed to imposed upon them by others.

    Nonsense. "My kingdom is not of this world", "Render unto ceasar, that which is Ceasars" and "obey all authorities instituited among men". Christianity doesnt concern itself with government. I cant even imagine what form a Christian Theocracy would take. Nothing in the bible calls for or would even support some member of clergy at the head of government.
     
  16. dixon76710

    dixon76710 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2010
    Messages:
    58,376
    Likes Received:
    4,438
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Islam calls for an Islamic Caliphate. Islamic government applying Islamic doctrine as the law of the land. Christianity is the opposite. "My kingdom is not of this world". Christianity is about the individuals relationship with god and fellow man. Doesnt concern itself with government.
     
  17. FreshAir

    FreshAir Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2012
    Messages:
    150,175
    Likes Received:
    62,815
    Trophy Points:
    113
    your kidding right? no errors in the Bible? what bible are you reading?
     
  18. FreshAir

    FreshAir Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2012
    Messages:
    150,175
    Likes Received:
    62,815
    Trophy Points:
    113
    some Christians in America want Biblical law, most do not

    some Muslims in America want Sharia law, most do not


    .
     
  19. dixon76710

    dixon76710 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2010
    Messages:
    58,376
    Likes Received:
    4,438
    Trophy Points:
    113
     
  20. sammy

    sammy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2009
    Messages:
    3,733
    Likes Received:
    337
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Keep thinking that way if you want but the majority of Americans are voting Obama out in November
    partly because the US economy is a total disaster. If Americans could go back in time to the Bus era of prosperity they would. But that ain't gonna happen under Obama.

    In case you feel that something is wrong in the United States today, you aren't crazy.
    Obama has sent the United States into a decline never before seen in it's history. More than 500K college graduates entered the job market in May and less than 69K new private sector jobs were available for them. You do the math!
     
  21. sammy

    sammy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2009
    Messages:
    3,733
    Likes Received:
    337
    Trophy Points:
    83
    One explanation: Joseph's father Jacob took Heli's wife to raise up children for Heli and left Joseph adopted in Heli's widow's house. There are other explanations possible, but he possibly had a biological and an adopted father. So many people do also today.

    A proven contradiction doesn't exist here.
     
  22. sammy

    sammy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2009
    Messages:
    3,733
    Likes Received:
    337
    Trophy Points:
    83
    False! It would only be a contradiction if the Bible said that only Mary Magdalene was present. But it doesn't say that.

    Just because one verse doesn't mention all were present doesn't mean they weren't all present.
    God choose to mention only a subset of those present in certain verses. It was his choice.
     
  23. dixon76710

    dixon76710 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2010
    Messages:
    58,376
    Likes Received:
    4,438
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Differnce being, nothing in the bible supports such a theocracy. Whereas the Islamic caliphate is required by Islamic doctrine.

    [5.44] ...whoever did not judge by what Allah revealed, those are they that are the unbelievers.
    [5.45] ...whoever did not judge by what Allah revealed, those are they that are the unjust.
    [5.47] ...whoever did not judge by what Allah revealed, those are they that are the transgressors.
    ...
    Ruling by Islam is the most frequent issue discussed in Quran after the belief and creed. Therefore, Khilafah was discussed by many Muslim scholars, the following are the definition of some of them to Khilafah.

    1: Ibn Khaldoon defined it as: A representation, of the one who has the right to adopt the divine rules, aimed at protecting the Deen and ruling the world (Dunia) with it.

    2: Al-Mawirdi defined it as: Succession of the Prophethood aimed at protecting the Deen and ruling the world (Dunia).
    http://alkhilafah.net/s1.html

    Islam is not merely a belief, so that it is enough merely to preach it. Islam, which is a way of life, takes practical steps to organize a movement for freeing man. Other societies do not give it any opportunity to organize its followers according to its own method, and hence it is the duty of Islam to annihilate all such systems, as they are obstacles in the way of universal freedom. ...
    This religion is really a universal declaration of the freedom of man from servitude to other men and from servitude to his own desires, which is also a form of human servitude; it is a declaration that sovereignty belongs to God alone and that He is the Lord of all the worlds. It means a challenge to all kinds and forms of systems which are based on the concept of the sovereignty of man; in other words, where man has usurped the Divine attribute. Any system in which the final decisions are referred to human beings, and in which the sources of all authority are human, deifies human beings by designating others than God as lords over men.
    This declaration means that the usurped authority of God be returned to Him and the usurpers be thrown out-those who by themselves devise laws for others to follow, thus elevating themselves to the status of lords and reducing others to the status of slaves. In short, to proclaim the authority and sovereignty of God means to eliminate all human kingship and to announce the rule of the Sustainer of the universe over the entire earth. ...
    After annihilating the tyrannical force, whether it be in a political or a racial form, or in the form of class distinctions within the same race, Islam establishes a new social, economic and political system, in which the concept of the freedom of man is applied in practice.
    http://web.youngmuslims.ca/online_library/books/milestones/hold/chapter_4.htm

    Their fascination was arisen after the defenders of democracy and the
    defenders of other such false ideologies (who have no religion) defended democracy simply for the sake of it, and they mixed the falsehood with the Truth.
    ..... They distort the Truth with Falsehood, and mix the Light with the Darkness, and the Polytheism of democracy with the Monotheism of Islam. But we, with the help of Allah, replied to all of these fallacies, and showed that democracy is a religion. But it is not Allah’s religion. It is not the religion of monotheism, and its parliamentary councils are just places of polytheism, and safe havens for paganistic beliefs. All of these must be avoided to achieve monotheism, which is Allah’s right upon His servants. We must destroy those who follow democracy, and we must take their followers as enemies - hate them and wage a great Jihad against them.
    Maqdisi
    http://www.kalamullah.com/Books/DemocracyReligion.pdf

    You wont find any such doctrine within biblical doctrine.
     
  24. sammy

    sammy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2009
    Messages:
    3,733
    Likes Received:
    337
    Trophy Points:
    83
    It would be a contradiction but it isn't as the Bible never says that.
    The animals were created first.

    Genesis 1:24 Then God said "Let the Earth bring forth living creatures after their kind: cattle and creeping things and beasts of the Earth after their kind; and it was so.
    25 God made the beasts of the Earth after their kind and the cattle after their kind and everything that creeps on the ground after its kind and God saw that it was good.
    26 Then God said "Let Us (trinity reference, not angels) make man in Our image according to our likeness; and let them rule over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the sky and over the cattle and over all the Earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the Earth."
    27 God created man in His own image in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them.


    Genesis 2:18 Then Jehovah (LORD) God said," It is not good for the man to be alone; I will make him a helper suitable for him."
    19 Out of the ground Jehovah God formed every beast of the field and every bird of the sky, and brought them to the man ...
    I can see where it looks like two different accounts but notice in chapter 2 verse 19 it doesn't state the word 'then'. It does not read:
    Then Jehovah God formed every beast...
    The way the verse is started off we can still infer that God had already created the animals and it is just stating again how they were created.

    In case you feel that something is wrong in the United States today, you aren't crazy.
    Obama has sent the United States into a decline never before seen in it's history. More than 500K college graduates entered the job market in May and less than 69K new private sector jobs were available for them. You do the math!
     
  25. Kessy_Athena

    Kessy_Athena New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2010
    Messages:
    1,760
    Likes Received:
    57
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Actually, the primary issue was about the sale of indulgences, and general issues related to penitence and the forgiveness of sins. The Papal Schism, where there were two different claimants to the Papacy for something like 40 years - was also a significant contributing factor. For example, there's nothing in Luther's Ninety-Five Theses that is even remotely related to the divine right of kings. I don't believe that in all the chaos of the Reformation that the Protestants ever challenged the idea of divine right monarchy. Seriously, this is the first time I've ever heard such a claim.

    Tyranny is always imposed by a majority who approve of it. The Puritans and others simply moved to the New World so that they could be that majority. Freedom of religion does not mean the freedom to impose your religion on others.

    I'll buy the argument that Christianity's core doctrines and their book mostly do not concern themselves with government one way or another. But by making that argument, you are implicitly saying that those doctrines neither support nor oppose democratic government.

    The argument I was making is that the basic Christian worldview of a single all powerful god is not structured in a democratic way. But I do have to concede that while worldview and politics often influence each other, they are certainly not linked in any hard or direct way.

    While I'm not an authority on either Islamic or Christian theology, I don't think theocracy is any more required by Islam then Christianity. And it's patently untrue that Christian theology is opposed to theocracy. During the Middle Ages, the Pope directly ruled a large part of Italy. Even today Vatican City is technically a theocracy since the Pope is head of state, although given the unique nature of Vatican City, I don't think it really properly counts as a theocracy. The English monarch is the head of the Anglican church and its assorted offshoots. While that's largely symbolic in Elizabeth II's time, it most certainly was not in Henry VIII's time. The head of the Eastern Orthodox church was the Byzantine Emperor until the fall of Constantinople.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page